Psychological Assessment Training in Clinical Psychology Doctoral Programs |
| |
Authors: | Joni L. Mihura Manali Roy Robert A. Graceffo |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Department of Psychology, University of Toledo;2. Cambridge Health Alliance, Cambridge, Massachusetts |
| |
Abstract: | We surveyed American Psychological Association–accredited clinical psychology doctoral programs' (n = 83) training in psychological assessment—specifically, their coverage of various assessment topics and tests in courses and practica, and whether the training was optional or required. We report results overall and separately per training model (clinical science, scientist-practitioner, and practitioner-focused). Overall, our results suggest that psychological assessment training is as active, or even more active, than in previous years. Areas of increased emphasis include clinical interviewing and psychometrics; multimethod, outcomes, health, and collaborative or therapeutic assessment; and different types of cognitive and self-report personality tests. All or almost all practice-focused programs offered training with the Thematic Apperception Test and Rorschach compared to about half of the scientist-practitioner programs and a third of the clinical science programs. Although almost all programs reported teaching multimethod assessment, what constitutes different methods of assessing psychopathology should be clarified in future studies because many programs appear to rely on one method—self-report (especially clinical science programs). Although doctoral programs covered many assessment topics and tests in didactic courses, there appears to be a shortage of program-run opportunities for students to obtain applied assessment training. Finally, we encourage doctoral programs to be familiar with (a) internships' assessment expectations and opportunities, (b) the professional guidelines for assessment training, and (c) the American Psychological Association's requirements for preinternship assessment competencies. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|